Originally Posted by
HH6702
A theme park in Scotland has been placed into administration and we reason was
due to poor trading figures, the company wasn’t eligible for government lockdown funding.
wonder if this is the reason why RB is calling on the government needing funding the same as Easyjet
easyjet is not in the same position as virgin. easyJet's underlying business is profitable in "normal" times, virgin is not.
Virgin has made a profit in only 4 out of the last 10 years. Easyjet has made a profit in all of them years. In fact, easyjet has made a profit in all of the years since it became a public company in 2002. The last 20 years have included 9/11, sars, bird flu, swine flu, volcanoes etc. and despite these issues easyjet has made a profit. What this year might look like is the unknown but next year, given a "normal" scenario, even a "new normal" easyJet is likely to be profitable.
In the last 4 years easyjet has made almost £2bn profit before tax, and around £2bn for the 4 years before that. Virgin on the other hand has made £69m profit in the last 4 years (the last 2 years have been loses) and lost £306m in the 4 years before that. The numbers and therefore the companies are not comparable.
I repeat - virgin's underlying business is not
profitable even during "normal" times. If you were a bank or the government, why would you offer a loan when the business is not profitable? One of the basic tests for a loan is the ability to repay.
Going back to your post, the theme park you mention has been in financial struggles for years according to the following link. This is more akin to the virgin scenario and explains why a loan has not been forthcoming.
https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/...dministration/